 |
|
|
brogan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2011
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
very very sharp, AF is quick enough for just about anything while using 7D
|
|
Cons:
|
IS is a bit noise at times, gave a 9/10 for build quality because of the lack of weather seals
|
|
|
I have had this lens for two years now and still love it!
I had (what I thought) was a problem, with soft images constantly. This until i replaced the UV filter with a Zeiss T UV filter. This lens is super sharp and lovely to use for just about any type of photography.
My father bought the 200mm F2.8 MK II two months ago and they are in a different ball park. But for the price you pay for the 300mm f4. It more than holds its own weight.
Combined with a 1.4 III it is also amazing. Found almost no problems with the IS being slower.
I have no problems with picking up this gem before any other lens. Unless the light is not permitting.
OVERALL: the focal distance is perfect for me, the image quality is perfect (sell on Getty), AF is fast enough to track birds in flight, and the IS is very welcoming on a long hike. I would recommend this lens to anyone!!
Regards
Brogan
|
|
 May 15, 2013
|
|
James Markus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3842
|
|
Review Date: Sep 21, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $915.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light weight, IS and excellent build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Excellent reach when paired with the Canon 1.4x TC and the 7D (almost 700mm). Light, well built, IS that really works well, and very, very sharp. What else could you want in a 300mm lens?
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2012
|
|
lherrainz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 20, 2012
Location: Argentina
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 20, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, lightweight, small, IS, you have 420mm and 600mm using canon extenders.
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF, noisy IS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2012
|
|
dmcharg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 1, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 784
|
|
Review Date: Aug 28, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Strikes an excellent balance between size, weight, price and gives you a very nice fast prime with great bokeh. The close focus distance also makes this lens great for macro work as well.
|
|
Cons:
|
Would be good to see canon update this but not if they double the price.
|
|
|
A really outstanding lens. A really great prime that strikes a nice balance of size, weight & price. Bokeh is wonderful as well. When you consider the size, weight and price of the 300 2.8 this lens is a real bargain and really delivers. Having F4, IS and the close focus distance makes this lens very flexible. Would be nice if canon upgrade and maybe added the latest IS but i hope they don't double the price of this lens. There really is something to be said for a telephoto lens with this size/weight as you really can walk around all day with it.
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2012
|
|
hogband
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 639
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Size. Weight. well-built. Love the IS even though it took some time getting used to it.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I bought this lens in October 2011. I shoot Arkansas Razorbacks football and high school football but couldn't justify trying to purchase a 300 2.8. I had been shooting the games, mostly in daytime, with my 70-200 nonIS with a 1.4 extender. After switching to the 300, I can't believe I hadn't got one earlier. This is a great lens and with a 7D and higher ISOs, I don't have any problems using this combo at 6400 or higher.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2011
|
|
Woodgrain
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 10, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2011
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent size and weight. Great hood. Wonderful close minimum focus. Very nice soft case at no extra cost.
|
|
Cons:
|
Image quality soft at f4 and not spectacular at any aperature. AF not fast or consistently accurate.
|
|
|
I recently sold my new 2011 300mm f4 IS lens after about six months of ownership. It was the perfect size and weight for a 300mm prime, and the short minimum focus distance was ideal for a variety of subjects. It had an excellent sliding lens hood and a nice soft case was supplied at no additional cost. I really wanted to like the 300mm f4, but at the end of the day image quality is all that really matters, and in this area the lens was a disappointment for me. I use a 40D, and if I was careful to shoot stopped down to at least 5.6 this lens could produce pretty good images, but not significantly better than the 70-300 consumer (non-L) zoom stopped down to f8 that I used to own. My 70-200 f4 IS with a 1.4x teleconverter (280mm) yielded slightly sharper images at f5.6 than the bare 300mm f4 wide open and equivalent images when both were stopped down. I bought the 300mm f4 planning to use it with a 1.4x teleconverter, but this degraded the image noticeably, even stopped down to f8. In addition, the IS on the 300mm f4 was only good for one or two stops max with no tripod-sensing feature, and the AF was not consistently accurate and was too slow to follow birds in flight when using a 1.4x teleconverter. Downloading images at the end of a day shooting with the 300mm f4 was often frustrating – too many missed shots that were either slightly out of focus or simply too soft for my expectations.
I traded my 300mm f4 for a used 2009 300mm f2.8 IS. The difference between these two 300mm lenses is like night and day. The image quality from the f2.8 lens is amazingly sharp and brilliant. The outrageously fast and accurate AF and tripod-sensing IS combined with the very bright viewfinder image make the lens a joy to use. It can be shot wide open with confidence and accepts a 1.4x teleconverter with virtually no image quality loss. With the converter the 300mm f2.8 still focuses faster and more accurately than the bare 300mm f4 lens. Yes, the 300mm f2.8 is bigger and heavier, but it is still quite portable and I routinely hand-hold it with no problems. Many people are happy with the 300mm f4, but if, like me, you expect a little more from an L-series prime lens, rent the f2.8 version and try it for yourself. Is a used 300mm f2.8 worth three times the price of a new 300mm f4? For me, the answer is absolutely yes.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2011
|
|
AirbornePhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 31, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 59
|
|
Review Date: Oct 3, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $899.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focusing, IS is outstanding. Great build and honestly it's one of my favorite lenses I own. Fun for a cheap price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not too much. The IS is a little noisy, but I dont have issues with that. If i were to suggest one thing, I'd like bigger front glass on it, maybe a drop in filter.
|
|
|
this is one of the best (for the price) lenses i have ever used. for a littler under/over (varying where you buy it) $1000, this fast canon prime lens can capture everything from a senior photo to a well lit hockey game. It's build is rugged. It has survived 10 months so far with me in Afghanistan, and the glass just keeps on producing better and better pictures (1Ds/7D). The fast focus combined with the 77mm glass paints quite a picture, with excellent contrast and minimal CA, even in full frame. I enjoy shooting this lens more than any other because of its weight (compared to the 300 2.8) and its ability to focus so darn fast! Overall I gave it a 9 because no lens is perfect (besides the 200 1.8 of course). great job canon, cant wait to see the mark II version of it!
|
|
|
Oct 3, 2011
|
|
Januzzi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 22, 2011
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 2, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast autofocus; sharp images; macro function
|
|
Cons:
|
non
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 2, 2011
|
|
brogan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2011
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 25, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
1.Sharp
2. Contrast
3.IS
4.light (relatively speacking)
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I recieved my Canon 300mm f4 L IS USM lens on the the 17th August this year.
it is amazing. And even though I have not used it for the main purpose for why I got it (wildlife), I have shot some amazing pics of my dogs, cats and just playing around with it.
cant wait till this weekend when I take it to northern farms.
I have been waiting for this lens for quite some time. now I just need to get the 1.4 TC and then I'm sorted for a long time.
I also own the 200mm 2.8 mark 1. and although this lens is my favorite, this lens is creeping ever so clode to it, just based on the quality of pictures. the 200mm 2.8 i love for the size and it does not draw attention as the 300mm does. (white lens).
Kruger next holiday will be amazing with these two lenses in my camera bag.
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2011
|
|
Xoa.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
minimum focusing distance; sharp wide open; light weight; bokeh can be stunning
|
|
Cons:
|
IS could be better.
|
|
|
This thing lives on my 7D with a 1.4 tele.
It is my wild life lens (and birds...its short for birding, so you get creative), my landscape lens (yeah... sometimes), macro lens, portrait lens (on occasion). It is light weight, and great for hiking.
The Bokeh can be absolutely beautiful.
It is sharp wide open, even with a 1.4 tele on it.
Fantastic Lens. Try it, you'll love it.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2011
|
|
asanduloiu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 377
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2011
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
I will not going to quote again the lens in any way, for not changing the results, but I feel the necessity to come again here and express the enthusiasm for the lens. I do use it with a Kenko DG Pro 300 1,4x and the results are just extremely satisfatory. Some of them could be viewed at http://sanduloiu.ro/en/home
Strongly recommend this lens! You'll not going to regret the purchase.
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2011
|
|
Hudsons
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 8, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Feb 6, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light for focal length, sharp, handy built in hood
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I bought this lens for a series of adventure cruise holidays to the high Arctic and the Scottish Islands. I have also used it for seascapes and sea bird shots along the English coast. It was a 'toss up' between this lens and the 100-400 L, this just won. I have achieved good results with this lens (and it does work with the 1.4X converter.) I managed to hand hold it in a zodiac to get good shots of polar bears.
|
|
|
Feb 6, 2011
|
|
asanduloiu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 377
|
|
Review Date: Feb 4, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, sharp at any aperture, easy to shoot handheld. Good quality optics.
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far...
|
|
|
Just bought it for our photo club in Pitesti, Romania. I've tested it on the river taking pictures of birds and I'm very pleased of it. Easy to shoot handheld, AF is quite fast, but I use it with a 1,4x teleconverter and I know it slows the lens' speed. It seems to be quite well built, so it will be on the field, working, a lot of time.
Evene if I bought it from Romania, meaning all the EU taxes so it became more expensive, my price rating was 9 because the original US price is very good, but hardly to touch for us.
|
|
|
Feb 4, 2011
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 272
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp wide open, compact compared to 300/2.8, built-in hood, inexpensive, works great with 1.4x extender, fast and silent AF, distance limit, macro capability
|
|
Cons:
|
IS is old, AF can be faster, weight is close to 100-400L, a bit long
|
|
|
I read lots of good compliments about this lens and have looked for it for a while. I am not disappointed. The lens is a solid performer. However, there are still some room for improvement in the next version.
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2010
|
|
buddyRoland
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Oct 30, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 194
|
|
Review Date: Jun 27, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast autofocus; sharp images; beautiful bokeh; macro-like photography from a distance
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy IS.
|
|
|
I really wanted a 300mm 2.8 and will still get one in the future, but not the very near future because this prime telephoto lens performs superbly.
It takes excellent shots in less than favorable lighting. Outside it focuses better with my 1D3 better but inside my 5D2 with this lens takes better consistent pics.
I thought I would be using my 1D3 with this lens more but I reallly prefer it with my 5D2. With the 5D2 it produces beautiful images and wonderful headshots.
I perused the pages on this forum which gave me the confidence to purchase this lens. I am truly thankful for the informative posts.
Highly recommend.
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2010
|
|
bcguy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 17, 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 229
|
|
Review Date: Jun 19, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
It's very sharp, even wide open. It's not heavy for it's focal length. The IS works very well--I have gotten sharp shots down to 1/45 of a second! The built in hood is great! I like the fact that it can focus down to 59". It's very solidly constructed. Finally, it's relatively inexpensive for its focal length.
|
|
Cons:
|
The lens is great. I don't have anything to complain about. It could be cheaper, but compared to other lenses with comparable focal lengths, it's pretty reasonable.
|
|
My wife encouraged me to buy a longer lens, and for the budget, this is probably the most versatile fixed focal length moderately long lens that I could have bought. I often found myself needing something longer than the 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro lens which was my longest lens. I'm a prime lens freak, so I had the EF 200mm f/2.8 II in mind. My wife thought that something a little longer would open up new opportunities for me. As it turns out, she was right.
At first I was hesitant: would I find an f/4 lens useful? I usually shoot with rather wide apertures, so f/4 seemed very slow. I bought it thinking that there was a good possibility of returning it. Boy, was I wrong!
Looking through the viewfinder with this lens attached is such a joy. Backgrounds disappear into beautiful spherical highlights and soft blur. I didn't understand how much focal length effects the perceived depth of field. I'm blown away by this lens! They say the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM is better in every way, but I am very pleased with what the f/4 version can do.
When I say it's sharp, I mean it's SHARP. Let me show some examples:
wide open: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4011/4693722944_2c59232bbb_b.jpg
at f/5.0: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4692849658_007afe0c82_b.jpg
and here's another at f/4.5: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4067/4692217473_a5c04e7679_b.jpg
Just for fun, to show you what it does with out of focus highlights (shot at f/4.5): http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4062/4715553807_74d7100bea_b.jpg
The IS makes the lens very useful. I don't tend to use a tripod as much as I should, so IS allows me to use this lens on a regular basis. If I didn't have it, I'd have a bunch of blurry photos, and I'd be disappointed. I use this lens as I use any other lens in my collection--mostly hand held. If you like to be spontaneous and rarely use a tripod, like I do, you'll find this invaluable.
All in all, I'm really thrilled with the EF 300mm f/4L IS USM.
So what's wrong with it? It's not the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM. I'll admit it. I like to have the best. It pains me that I cannot afford the best at this time. That's okay, though. I'll get many, many great photos while I'm waiting.
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
169
|
313850
|
May 15, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
97% of reviewers
|
$1,060.26
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.71
|
9.15
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
